Mr. Speaker, someone said, “hear, hear.” If they were to use the notwithstanding clause every time there was an issue related to a mandatory minimum penalty, they would have used it 12, 15 or 20 times, no problem. Actually, there is a difference and this is the contrast between the government and the opposition. If I were to use the words of the Conservative member opposite, it is having that safety valve.
Let us understand that there are certain situations that come before a court where a judge makes a decision, and there might be a situation that should be exempted from that mandatory minimum. There are Crown attorneys, provincially appointed judges and appeal courts. Nothing prevents a situation where a judge at a lower court makes a decision that the Crown cannot make an appeal, or it can be brought up in other ways if in fact a mandatory minimum was inappropriately used. They do not need the notwithstanding clause. They do not have to fear independent judiciary by saying, “We do not trust all judges in this situation.”
Therefore, within the legislation, we would restore those areas where mandatory minimum sentences have been struck down. That is a good thing. We know that at least one Conservative member has recognized that. I do not quite understand why others do not see the value of that unless, of course, one believes, as I believe, that once again the Conservative Party of Canada is looking at ways in which it can prevent legislation from passing. The Conservatives are not responding to what Canadians are saying they want.
With respect to femicide in Canada, I would suggest that through this legislation Canada could play a leadership role in the world. This legislation deals with bumping up the crime of femicide murder to first-degree murder. There are other aspects to this legislation that deal with child exploitation.
I spent all my time talking about the mandatory minimum penalties because of the ridiculous comments coming from the Conservative Party, but within this legislation, Bill C-16, we see substantive changes that would protect Canadians.
The Conservatives have a choice. They can either listen to what Canadians are saying or stay with the politicization of the Conservative Party of Canada—